Impose automatic fines in cases of dog abuse

August 23, 2010

Thank you for alerting us (on the front page, upper right corner) in your Aug. 15 edition to the Parade insert article on what happened to Michael Vick's abused dogs. As most know locally, he is still a very highly paid Philadelphia Eagle.

My understanding is that in such animal abuse cases, the already financially-stretched-so-thin local animal shelters and loyal animal lovers just pay what they can for such abused animals out of the goodness of their hearts, not the person who caused the abuse.

The Parade article notes that the judge in the case issued an "almost unprecedented order" for nearly $1 million to be set aside to "rescue and rehabilitate as many of the dogs as possible."

Should not such funds be legally automatic in any and all such cases? Or should the abusers be allowed to spend their resources with appeals and other actions to try to continue to get out of the consequences of the animal abuse they caused?

Think about it, and do what you can. The animals are just "property," so they can do little. But you can. You are not just property at the whim of your owners.